In re Proving the Last Will & Testament of Browning

10 Mills Surr. 380, 80 Misc. 619, 142 N.Y.S. 683
CourtNew York Surrogate's Court
DecidedMay 15, 1913
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 10 Mills Surr. 380 (In re Proving the Last Will & Testament of Browning) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Surrogate's Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Proving the Last Will & Testament of Browning, 10 Mills Surr. 380, 80 Misc. 619, 142 N.Y.S. 683 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1913).

Opinion

Cohalan, S.

The paper offered for probate as the last will and testament of the decedent was executed October 24, 1897. The estate consists of personal property. The next of kin are a brother, Joseph G. Brówning, two sisters, Barbara Browning and Jane Gross, and many nieces and nephews who are children of deceased brothers and sisters of the decedent. The will bequeaths a life estate to two aunts of decedent, Sarah and Anna Browning, if they survive the testatrix, with a remainder to “ such of my beloved sisters, Barbara Browning and Jane Anna Pitt Browning (Jane Gross), who shall then be unmarried, never having been married, absolutely and forever.” If both of the two sisters named had married, the property was to be divided equally among all of the sisters living, at the death of the testatrix. Sarah Browning, one of the aunts named in the will, predeceased the testatrix, and the aunt named Anna Browning survived the testatrix. Barbara is the onf) sister of the decedent who remained unmarried, and under the terms of the will she has a remainder interest in the estate of the testatrix limited on a life estate to the surviving aunt. Barbara and her sister Jane are named in the will as executrices.

The probate of the paper propounded is contested by eleven nephews and nieces of the testatrix and by Joseph G. Browning and Jane Gross, a brother and sister of the testatrix. The proponent of the will is Barbara Browning, one of the two beneficiaries. Objections on the usual grounds were filed on behalf of all of the next of kin, except Barbara Browning.

At the trial the factum of the will was established and the [382]*382contestants produced many witnesses to show testamentary incapacity and the exercise of undue influence. The charge of undue influence is made against Barbara Browning, the sister of the testatrix, and the chief beneficiary of the will.

The decedent was one of seven children, whose mother died while the children were young. The father died in 1883, when the testatrix was about twenty years of age. After the mother’s death the children were brought up by the two aunts— sisters of the father. The father lost his own and some of the aunts’ money in investments, and it seems that he was very grateful to the two aunts for their unselfish devotion to him and to his children. This feeling of gratitude seems to have been shared by the testatrix and by her sister Barbara Browning, the proponent. In the course of time the brothers and most of the sisters married, while the testatrix and Barbara continued unmarried. Jane was married some years after the will was executed. Each of the girls had a small income from some real estate that they inherited from a grandfather, and this income enabled them to support themselves and the two old aunts with whom they lived prior to 1897.

The testatrix began to exhibit peculiarities and eccentricities when she was about eighteen years of age. The witnesses for the contestants testified to many acts of the testatrix extending over a period of ten or fifteen years prior to the execution of the will, and these acts were characterized by the witnesses as irrational. The testatrix was about thirty-four years of age when the will was executed in 1897. By this time her eccentricities had become so pronounced and her condition of health was such that a family conference of the brothers and sisters was held in September, 1897, when it was decided to send her to a private sanitarium. Accordingly, on October 35, 1897, she was admitted to “ Interpines,” a private institution at Goshen, New York. On October 31, 1897, testatrix [383]*383executed a power of attorney to her sister Barbara, and she executed her will at the home of a friend the evening before she went to the sanitarium. At this institution she could not be legally restrained, as she had not been legally committed there, and in January, 1898, accompanied by a nurse, she came to New York city, against the wishes of the superintendent. A day or two afterwards her brother Joseph and her sister Barbara had her legally adjudged insane before the special surrogate of Orange county, and on January 11, 1898, she was ordered committed to the Middletown State Hospital for the Insane. She remained there for about seven years and was “ discharged unimproved ” September 21, 1904.

Her hospital record while she was at the Middletown State Hospital is in evidence, and Dr. Ashley, the superintendent of that institution, has stated what he observed of the acts and condition of the testatrix while she was under his charge, and has stated his opinion of her mental condition based upon that observation. Dr. Ashley stated that in his opinion testatrix suffered from a paranoiac condition; that she was in an “ exceedingly unstable emotional condition, manifested by frequent outburst of temper; ” that she was “ pleasant at one moment and angry the next; ” that she believed she was being “ abused, neglected and ill-ti-eated by the physicians; ” that she was “ so disturbed, so fault finding and so troublesome ” that he finally asked her relatives to take her away. After her discharge from the Middletown State Hospital she was in a private institution at Caldwell, New Jersey, for a short time, and on December 22, 1904, she was admitted to the Central Islip State Hospital for the Insane, where she died in July, 1911. She was absolutely demented during the last three or four years of her life, and died hopelessly insane. The cause of death was acute dilatation of the heart.

Such in outline is the sad history of this unfortunate wo[384]*384man. There is no evidence in this case of undue influence, and there does not seem to be any foundation in fact, so far as appears from the testimony taken before me, for the allegation or suggestion that Barbara procured-the making of the will by any trick or device. There is nothing in the record to show that Barbara was anything but a faithful and affectionate sister, and it would seem from the letters that the testatrix wrote to her while she was in the hospital at Middletown that Barbara was her favorite and the one upon whom the testatrix relied for advice and attention.

The only real question in this case is the question of mental capacity. The issue narrows down to whether at the very time of the execution of this will testatrix was possessed of testamentary capacity. What is testamentary capacity has been well settled by the courts of this state. The rule laid down in Delafield v. Parish, 25 N. Y. 29, has been quoted many times with approval by the courts of this state and is reiterated in Matter of Lawrence, 48 App. Div. 83, a case somewhat analogous to the present one. The definition is as follows: “ It is essential that the testator has sufficient capacity to comprehend perfectly the condition of his property, his relations to the persons who were, or should, or might have been the objects of his bounty, and the scope and bearing of the provisions of his will. He must, in the language of the cases, have sufficient active memory to collect in his mind, without prompting, the particulars or elements of the business to be transacted and to hold them in his mind a sufficient length of time to perceive at least their obvious relations to each other, and be able to form some rational judgment in relation to them. A testator who has sufficient mental power to do these things is, within the meaning and intent of the Statute of Wills, a person of sound mind and memory, and is competent to dispose of his estate by will.” From this definition it is ap[385]

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In re Browning
150 N.Y.S. 1078 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1914)
In re Carpenter's Will
145 N.Y.S. 365 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1913)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
10 Mills Surr. 380, 80 Misc. 619, 142 N.Y.S. 683, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-proving-the-last-will-testament-of-browning-nysurct-1913.